From: David Luu (wicked01@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue May 21 2002 - 18:44:00 GMT-3
like i said before...
on the interface the default is 1
but when you go into router ospf and use the neighbor command with the
priority option it defaults to 0
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios113ed/113ed_cr/np1_
r/1rospf.htm#xtocid2457221
At 08:48 AM 5/21/2002 -0700, Jonathan Hays wrote:
>The default priority for OSPF is always ONE, even in NBMA mode. Doyle's
>book has a typographical error.
>
>You can test this yourself by setting up a small OSPF NBMA scenario. If
>you then type "show run" and you do NOT see the priority listed in the
>configuration that means the priority is currently at the default value.
>To verify this, type "show ip ospf int" and you will see the priority,
>as in the NBMA example below.
>
>RouterA#show ip ospf interface
>Serial0 is up, line protocol is up
> Internet Address 192.1.1.2/24, Area 0
> Process ID 65, Router ID 2.2.2.2, Network Type BROADCAST, Cost: 64
> Transmit Delay is 1 sec, State BDR, Priority 1
> Designated Router (ID) 1.1.1.1, Interface address 192.1.1.1
> <snip>
>
>Jonathan
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>David Luu
>Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2002 1:35 AM
>To: Schwantz; ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: Re: Jeff Doyle pg 558 OSPF defauly priority 0
>
>
>on an interface the default ospf priority is 1
>when specifying neighbors in an nbma environment, the default is 0
>
>At 03:39 PM 5/19/2002 +0800, Schwantz wrote:
> >David,
> >
> >If that is the case, what does Doyle mean when he says that the default
>
> >priority is 0 ?
> >
> >Kevin
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "David Luu" <wicked01@ix.netcom.com>
> >To: "Kevin Mitnick" <kevin_ross46@yahoo.co.uk>;
> ><ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Sent: Sunday, May 19, 2002 2:45 PM
> >Subject: Re: Jeff Doyle pg 558 OSPF defauly priority 0
> >
> >
> > > default priority is 1, and yes priority 0 does not let it
> > > participate in the DR selection
> > >
> > > At 06:37 AM 5/19/2002 +0100, Kevin Mitnick wrote:
> > > >Hi,
> > > >
> > > >I was reading page 558 of Jeff Doyle's Routing TCP/IP Volume 1 and
> > > >came across this paragraph.
> > > >
> > > >"The neighbor command configures Rembrandt with the IP addresses of
>
> > > >the interfaces of its three neighbors. The default priority is
> > > >zero; by not changing the default at Rembrandt, none of its
> > > >neighbors is eligible to become the DR or BDR?
> > > >
> > > >Doesn't having priority zero make a router ineligible to be DR or
> > > >BDR ?
> > > >
> > > >When I read Solie ( CCIE Practical Studies page 762), it wrote
> > > >
> > > >"The hub router of the multipoint network, or the router that has a
>
> > > >PVC to each site, should be statically configured as the DR. To
> > > >accomplish this, set the priority of the spoke or remote routers to
>
> > > >0. A priority of 0 tells OSPF that this interface or neighbor will
> > > >not participate in the DR/BDR election process"
> > > >
> > > >Am I missing something ? Could someone help clarify the above two
> > > >statements ? I read the archives and someone said that it might
> > > >have something to do with the nieghbor statements. However, both
> > > >books used the neighbor statements to identify their neigbors.
> > > >
> > > >Kevin
> > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:59:04 GMT-3